A wide variety of restraints for pets have been heretofore suggested and or utilized. Some such restraints have been adapted for use in vehicles (in some cases in conjunction with the existing seat belt restraints in the vehicle) to restrain the pet in case of accident or the like (see, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,450,130, 5,915,335, 5,794,571, 5,443,037, 5,167,203, 5,154,660, 5,035,203, 4,970,991, 4,907,451, 4,896,630, 4,715,618, 4,676,198, 4,512,286, 3,948,222, 3,310,034). Others are adapted for use with leashes or tethers, or for use as general wear harnesses in particular applications (see, for example, U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,161,505, 5,893,339, 5,743,216, 5,676,093, 5,511,515, 5,427,061, 5,359,964, 5,335,627, 4,655,172, 2,826,172, 2,605,744, 2,187,021, and 1,800,421).
Such heretofore known and/or utilized pet restraints and harnesses have not, however, entirely resolved satisfactorily the safety issues arising when carrying an animal in a vehicle. The problem here is two fold: human driver and passenger safety is compromised when riding with an animal because during an accident the animal, if unrestrained or inadequately restrained, becomes a projectile (a rather large and heavy one in the case of some canines); and animal safety is compromised in an accident when the animal is unrestrained or inadequately restrained.
Some heretofore known restraints have done little more than anchor the animal's leash in the vehicle. In such cases, the animal is still able to be thrown significant distances within the vehicle's cab in case of accident. Other, more considered, approaches have suggested restraint systems that better limit animal movement in the cab, but testing suggests that various design shortcomings and/or weaknesses in construction can result in failure of the restraint in critical circumstances. In particular, the use of multiple attachment sites between tethers and harnesses used in such restraints, or other inadequate interconnection thereof, increase the possibility of interconnection failure during an accident. In other cases, overly difficult systems of attachment of harnesses, tethers, and auto seat belt systems discourage animal owner use of such systems on a regular basis.
Moreover, as with humans, ongoing accurate fit of the restraint on the animal is required to maximize animal security during an accident. Heretofore, this problem has been addressed, if at all, by addition of cumbersome mechanisms requiring significant and frequent user adjustment and readjustment, thereby increasing the likelihood that such adjustments will not be made and adding to the expense of such restraints. Finally, a perception by both the user and the animal of discomfort of some restraints when applied may be at least in part to blame for a lack of acceptance in the field of pet vehicle safety belt harnesses. Further improvements could thus still be utilized.